A "DEEP" GREENWASHER DEFEATED

On November 9th, the Colorado Secretary of State dismissed a complaint alleging that Citizens for Sensible Energy Choices (CSEC), a group opposed to renewable energy mandates in Colorado , failed to report non-monetary contributions received from Xcel Energy, the nation’s fourth-largest electricity and natural gas utility. The “in-kind” gifts in question included the services of Xcel employee Michelle Stermer, office space in Xcel’s corporate headquarters, and the use of Xcel’s office equipment.

According to the State’s findings, it was “undisputed” that when Stermer electronically registered CSEC with the State – listing her workplace as the group’s mailing address – and filed its first contributions and expenditures report, she was in her Xcel office using Xcel equipment, and was in the middle of her workday. Even so, the complaint was dismissed on the grounds that Stermer was working on behalf of CSEC on a personal, volunteer basis, without compensation from Xcel.

Click to view the state's dismissal.

That Xcel lawfully maintained its distance from Stermer’s services for CSEC is dubious, considering the company supported the group in other ways, notably with at least $520,000 in cash contributions, and likely would not have skimped on lending it the mailbox, computer privileges and extended lunch hour of one of its employees. Yet despite any clouds of injustice hanging over the State’s decision, for CSEC’s rivals, those in favor of renewables requirements, the complaint’s defeat could not put a damper on their landmark victory of a week earlier, when Coloradans voted 53-47 percent in favor of Amendment 37. The successful ballot initiative, which CSEC was formed to make fail, forces Colorado utilities with over 40,000 customers to produce 3 percent of their electricity from renewables by 2007, 6 percent by 2011 and 10 percent by 2015.

Verbose about Voluntarism

Xcel was the largest donor to CSEC’s war chest of over $1 million, most of which was spent on opinion polling, media consulting, and a wave of television and radio ads, peaking in an all-out October assault, bashing Amendment 37 as the “Right idea. Wrong solution.” Despite the group’s name, there are no citizens in CSEC, which is effectively an “astroturf” (i.e. fake grassroots) operation of Xcel, Aquila , the Tri-State Generation & Transmission Association and other energy companies entrenched in fossil fuels. Representing their views, CSEC advocated that a sound renewable energy policy can be based on voluntary initiatives, not enforceable targets. The group claimed in radio ads that “more renewable is on the way” in Colorado , and notes on its website (www.voteno37.com) that “Xcel Energy is the nation’s second-largest retail provider of wind energy, with 250 megawatts of wind capacity on its Colorado system.”

The centerpiece of Xcel’s Colorado renewable energy portfolio is the Lamar wind farm, the nation’s fifth-largest, featuring 108 turbines that together can power 50,000 homes. But without government regulation, those 260-foot turbines would never have gotten off the ground. In 2001, Xcel submitted to the Colorado Public Utilities Commission (PUC) a required “preferred portfolio” for new electricity sources which the company intended to develop in coming years. Xcel’s plan, restricted to natural gas and coal, was rejected by the PUC, which demanded that the company build Lamar. Were it not for mandates, Xcel’s wind operations might still be motionless in Minnesota, as well, where in 1994 lawmakers enacted a renewable energy standard compelling the company (then known as Northern States Power) to develop 425 megawatts of wind by 2003.

Financial Fearmongering

Xcel’s opposition to Amendment 37 came down to its costs, which, according to CSEC’s ads, are to be paid with “a blank check” written by consumers. Yet research on the impacts of the amendment, as well as the very language of the amendment, show that Colorado consumers are not only protected under, but stand to benefit from an increasing supply of renewable energy.

As stated in its text, the amendment, “[requires] utilities to offer customers a rebate of $2.00 per watt and other incentives for solar generation; [provides] incentives for utilities to invest in renewable energy resources that provide net economic benefits to customers; [and limits] the retail rate impact of renewable energy resources to 50 cents per month for residential customers.” The Union of Concerned Scientists found that by 2025, Amendment 36 will save consumers $236 million on electricity and natural gas bills, bring the state $709 million in new capital investment and earn landowners $15 million for land leases on wind farms. Xcel itself added, perhaps unknowingly, to the case for Amendment 37, bragging that the Lamar wind farm will save Coloradans $4 million annually, and warning its customers that rising natural gas prices will raise their gas bills this winter. (On the other hand, the passage of Amendment 37 may push Xcel to lower the bills of 38,000 customers currently participating in Windsource, an optional Xcel wind power program that charges premiums, which, consumer advocates contend, the company keeps too high considering the comparatively low price of wind power.) Collectively, the economic evidence suggests that the only costs that Xcel could object to are its own investments in Colorado ’s clean energy future. And those were not the costs the company focused on in its scare tactics.

Bogus Bullet Points

Click to read the report.

Xcel’s 2004 Environmental Report contains the principles of its environmental commitment, among them:

• Strive to meet or surpass all regulatory requirements
• Invest in environmentally sound technologies
• Support environmental initiatives close to home
• Keep our customers and communities informed
• Promote energy efficiency, emissions reduction and natural resource conservation in our work

If Xcel had chosen to back Amendment 37, it would have fulfilled or highlighted its obligation to each of the above. Instead, by fighting the amendment, it failed on all counts, exposing beneath the rhetoric of its report a real set of principles:

• Avoid regulatory requirements
• Resist renewable energy investment
• Oppose initiatives to create renewable energy standards
• Disseminate disinformation to customers and voters
• Favor emissions- and resource-intensive fossil fuels over renewable energy

Xcel has engaged in what Corpwatch calls deep greenwash, designed “ to get the world's governments to allow corporations to police themselves through voluntary codes of conduct, win-win partnerships and best practices learning models, rather than binding legislation and regulation.” On the federal level, going back to the 1992 Rio Earth Summit and beyond, deep greenwash has consistently triumphed in the United States , preventing the nation from implementing carbon emissions regulations, as well as a host of other environmental policies. In making Colorado the first state to adopt a renewable energy standard by way of a ballot initiative, Colorado voters have reason to congratulate themselves on, and voters throughout the country should find an example in, a precedent-setting victory over deep greenwash.

home > take greenwash to the cleaners > greenwasher of the month > october 2004